On June 27, 1914, Colonel Edward House, close adviser to U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, meets with Foreign Secretary Edward Grey of Britain, over lunch in London.

The meeting, part of a diplomatic tour of Europe that House made during the early summer of 1914, took place several weeks after House’s arrival in London, the previous June 9, after visiting Berlin, Germany, and Paris, France. The purpose of House’s trip was to persuade Germany and Britain to join with the United States in a diplomatic alliance in order to preserve peace, not only in Europe but in the world. House had long believed that, due to the mass amount of military and naval might the great powers of Europe had accumulated, they, along with America, could work together to prevent major wars. On his trip to Europe, he sought an agreement between Britain and Germany to limit the size of their respective navies and cease the naval build-up that had been occurring over the past decade, in order to preserve the tenuous balance of power and avoid major conflict between the two great power blocs that had lined up in Europe by 1914: France, Russia and Great Britain on one side, and Germany, Austria-Hungary and a tentative Italy on the other.

In Berlin, House had achieved his primary goal of the visit, a private audience with Kaiser Wilhelm I, which he was granted on June 1. As House recorded in his diary, the two men discussed “the European situation as it affected the Anglo-Saxon race.” The kaiser was of the opinion that Britain, Germany and the U.S.—as the best representatives of Christian civilization—were natural allies against the semi-barbarous Latin and Slavic nations (including France and Russia), but that all the Europeans should ally in defense of Western civilization “as against the Oriental races.” House worked to persuade Wilhelm that Britain would not seek to ally itself with Russia if Germany would cease the challenge to its naval power. Both men agreed that American moderation—from House, for example, or from Wilson himself—might aid in bringing the great European powers together.

House left Germany after promising the kaiser to attempt to secure Britain’s agreement to an American initiative. From Paris on June 3, he wrote to President Wilson that “both England and Germany have one feeling in common and that is fear of one another.” If the two nations could get together and work to solve their misunderstandings, House believed, future war in Europe could be averted.

The meeting with Grey on June 27 was arranged by Walter Hines Page, the U.S. ambassador to Britain. House and Grey discussed at length the tense political situation in Europe: France’s desire to take revenge on Germany for taking their territories of Alsace and Lorraine in 1871; Britain’s need to maintain good relations with Russia; and Germany’s aggressive naval program. House in turn warned Grey of “the militant war spirit in Germany and of the high tension of the people” that he had witnessed during his recent visit, and expressed his opinion that “the kaiser himself and most of his immediate advisors did not want war because they wished Germany to expand commercially and grow in wealth, but the army was military and aggressive and ready for war at any time.” Nonetheless, the two men both agreed, by the end of the meeting, that “Neither England, Germany, Russia, nor France desire war.”

Less than 24 hours later, however, Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife Sophie were killed by bullets fired at point-blank range by a 19-year-old Serbian nationalist, Gavrilo Princip, during an official visit to Sarajevo, Bosnia. Vienna, like the rest of the world, blamed their upstart nemesis in the Balkans, Serbia, for the crime, and entreated Germany to stand behind it in the case of war with Serbia and its powerful ally, Russia. A stunned and outraged Kaiser Wilhelm gave this assurance, and by the end of July, Europe was at war.

A pharmacist from Nürnberg, Xaver was 30 years of age when he was wounded in action near Neuville St.Vaast on 10 June 1915. After suffering for over two weeks in a military hospital, he succumbed to his wounds on 27 June and is now buried in the German Military Cemetery at Frasnoy.

‘Feeling very much off colour and was relieved of duty for the day. About 6pm an outburst of rifle and machine gun fire followed by heavy fire from both our artillery and the enemys took place and continued for about an hour. A seaplane flew very low over Kaba Tepe and dropped 4 bombs in quick succession at about 6am. The new howitzers fired a few shells today, they make a peculiar whistling sound going through the air, quite a different sound to the high velocity shells from the field guns.’

27 June 1915 - 5 PN, Italian, PN class Torpedo Boat
Torpedoed by the German submarine UB1 in the Gulf of Venice. At the time UB1 was disguised as the Austrian U10 as Germany and Italy were not at war at the time.

SOLDIER AND DRAMATIST, BEING THE LETTERS OF HAROLD CHAPIN, AMERICAN CITIZEN WHO DIED FOR ENGLAND AT LOOS ON SEPTEMBER 26TH, 1915.

To his Mother.

June 27th. 1915.

DEAREST MATER

I'll tell you what you can send me: a list of the vols. in the Home University Library; a list of the vols. in that series of one shilling or one shilling and sixpenny Handbooks published by the Oxford or Cambridge University Press; a copy of Bohn's (reissue at one shilling of their library!) "Plotinus" published by Bell who have bought Bohn out; a copy of Rev. Collin's "Plautus and Terence" published by Blackwood at one shilling (reissue), and any Joseph Conrad novel at one shilling except "Typhoon." That'll cost you three shillings in toto.

Brigadier General Sydney Charles Edgar Herring CMG, DSO, VD (8 October 1881 – 27 May 1951) was an Australian Army colonel and temporary Brigadier General in World War I. He retired in 1946 as an honorary brigadier general. (...)

World War I
Herring was appointed to the First Australian Imperial Force on 9 October 1914 with the rank of captain in the 13th Infantry Battalion. The battalion left Sydney on 22 December 1914 for Egypt, where Herring was promoted to major and given command of 'D' Company on 1 February 1915. The 13th Battalion landed at Anzac Cove on the evening of 25 April 1915. Ordered to take his company up to Russell's Top and link up with the New Zealanders, Herring and his men climbed the thick scrub opposite Pope's Hill. After taking heavy casualties Herring decided to pull back his line a bit. By the end of the action Herring had retreated back into Monash Valley.

When the Turks broke through the line into Quinn's Post on 29 May 1915, the temporary post commander, Lieutenant Colonel Pope, ordered Herring to make a counterattack, which he fully expected would be extremely costly. Just as Herring was about to order the charge, there was a sudden burst of enemy fire, which abruptly almost ceased. Herring gave the word and his men charged across the open and made it practically unscathed, their attack having coincided with a Turkish assault further down the line and in a location where the Turkish machine gunners could not fire without hitting their own men. The remaining Turks in the post eventually surrendered.

Herring was slightly wounded on 17 May 1915 but remained on duty. On 27 June 1915, he assumed acting command of the 13th Infantry Battalion after the battalion commander, Major Durrant was evacuated sick. Herring was confirmed as commander on 26 August 1915. On 15 October 1915, he was evacuated to Egypt sick, returning to his unit at Anzac on 19 November 1915. For his services at Anzac, Herring was mentioned in dispatches.

On 3 January 1916, Herring arrived in Alexandria with the 13th Battalion following the evacuation of Anzac. On 21 February 1916, the battalion was split, half going to form the new 45th Infantry Battalion. Herring took command of the new battalion, while Durrant resumed command of the old. Unfortunately, the new battalions soon had to absorb large numbers of men unwanted by the old battalions and left behind when they moved to France. On 12 March 1916, he became a temporary lieutenant colonel. He was promoted to the rank on 24 June 1916.

The 45th Battalion departed Alexandria on 2 June 1916, arriving at Marseilles on 8 June. In August, the battalion was committed to the fighting at Pozieres, losing 448 men on its first tour. For his leadership at Pozieres, Herring was mentioned in dispatches and awarded the Distinguished Service Order (DSO). At Messines in June 1917, the battalion lost 568 men in pillbox fighting on the Oosttaverne Line. Herring, who had ordered repeated attacks on pillboxes that his men could not capture, was again mentioned in dispatches. On 24 September 1917 he became a brevet major in the AMF.

On 7 October 1917, Herring took over command of the 4th Training Group in England. This group was responsible for training the brigade's reinforcements. The group was abolished on 8 November 1917. On 11 February 1918, Herring took command of the 3rd Training Brigade. On 7 May 1918, he returned to France where he resumed command of the 45th Battalion. On 26 June 1918 he became commander of the 13th Infantry Brigade and was promoted to colonel and temporary brigadier general on 30 June 1918. The brigade played an important part in the final campaign under his leadership. He was mentioned in dispatches for the fourth time and made a Companion of St Michael and St George (CMG) on 3 June 1919.

Sharif Hussein's Proclamation of Independence from Turkey, 27 June 1916

On 27 June 1916 Sharif Hussein bin Ali, Emir of Mecca, issued a proclamation in which he announced himself, as a direct descendant of Mohammed, as the true leader of the Islamic faith. In this he was effectively seeking to depose Ottoman Sultan Mehmed V as spiritual leader, whom he represented as a mere tool of the Young Turk administration.

Numerous reasons were cited to support Hussein's claim, not least of which was the alleged mistreatment by the Turks of Arabs in Syria, and the controversial argument put forward by the Young Turks (in 1909) that all religions were to be regarded as equal.

Hussein's objective in initiating the Great Arab Revolt was to establish a single independent and unified Arab state stretching from Aleppo (Syria) to Aden (Yemen), based on the ancient traditions and culture of the Arab people, the upholding of Islamic ideals and the full protection and inclusion of ethnic religious minorities.

Reproduced below is the text of King Hussein's 27 June 1916 proclamation.

King Hussein's Proclamation, 27 June 1916

In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate

This is our general circular to all our Brother Moslems

"0 Lord, do thou judge between us and our nation with truth; for Thou art the best judge"

It is well known that of all the Moslem Rulers and Emirs, the Emirs of Mecca, the Favoured City, were the first to recognize the Turkish Government.

This they did in order to unite Moslem opinion and firmly establish their community, knowing that the great Ottoman Sultans (may the dust of their tombs be blessed and may Paradise be their abode) were acting in accordance with the Book of God and the Sunna of his Prophet (prayers be unto him) and were zealous to enforce the ordinances of both these authorities.

With this noble end in view the Emirs before mentioned observe those ordinances unceasingly. I myself, protecting the honour of the State, caused Arabs to rise against their fellow Arabs in the year 1327 [1909 of the Christian era] in order to raise the siege of Abha, and in the following year a similar movement was carried out under the leadership of one of my sons, as is well known.

The Emirs continued to support the Ottoman State until the Society of Union and Progress appeared in the State and proceeded to take over the administration thereof and all its affairs.

The result of this new administration was that the State suffered a loss of territory which quite destroyed its prestige, as the whole world knows, was plunged into the horrors of war and brought to its present perilous position, as is patent to all.

This was all done for certain well-known ends, which our feelings forbid to dilate upon. They caused Moslem hearts to ache with grief for the Empire of Islam, for the destruction of the remaining inhabitants of her provinces - Moslem as well as non-Moslem - some of them hanged or otherwise done to death, others driven into exile.

Add to this the losses they have sustained through the war in their persons and property, the latter especially in the Holy Land as is briefly demonstrated by the fact that in that quarter the general stress compelled even the middle classes to sell the doors of their houses, their cupboards and the wood from their ceilings, after selling all their belongings to keep life in their bodies.

All this evidently did not fulfil the designs of the Society of Union and Progress.

They proceeded next to sever the essential bond between the Ottoman Sultanate and the whole Moslem community, to wit, adherence to the Koran and the Sunna. One of the Constantinople newspapers, called Al-Ijtihad, actually published an article maligning (God forgive us) the life of the Prophet (on whom be the prayer and peace of God), and this under the eye of the Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire and its Sheikh of Islam, and all the Ulema, ministers and nobles.

It adds to this impiety by denying the word of God, "The male shall receive two portions," and decides that they shall share equally under the law of inheritance.

Then it proceeds to the crowning atrocity of destroying one of the five vital precepts of Islam, the Fast of Ramadan, ordering that the troops stationed at Medina, Mecca or Damascus may break the fast in the same way as troops fighting on the Russian frontier, thereby falsifying the clear Koranic injunction, "Those of you who are sick or on a journey."

It has put forth other innovations touching the fundamental laws of Islam (of which the penalties for infringement are well known) after destroying the Sultan's power, robbing him even of the right to choose the chief of his Imperial Cabinet or the private minister of his august person, and breaking the constitution of the Caliphate of which Moslems demand the observance.

In spite of all, we have accepted these innovations in order to give no cause for dissension and schism. But at last the veil was removed and it became apparent that the Empire was in the hands of Enver Pasha, Djemal Pasha and Talaat Bey, who were administering it just as they liked and treating it according to their own sweet will.

The most striking proof of this is the notice lately sent to the Kadi of the Tribunal at Mecca, to the effect that he must deliver judgment solely on evidence written down in his presence in court and must not consider any evidence written down by Moslems among themselves, thus ignoring the verse in the Surat-al-Baqara.

Another proof is that they caused to be hanged at one time 21 eminent and cultured Moslems and Arabs of distinction, in addition to those they had previously put to death - the Emir Omar el-Jazairi, the Emir Arif esh-Shihabi, Shefik Bey el-Moayyad, Shukri Bey elAsali, Abd el-Wahab, Taufk Bey el-Baset, Abd el-Hamid elZahrawi, Abd el-Ghani el-Arisi, and their companions, who are well-known men.

Cruel-hearted men could not easily bring themselves to destroy so many lives at one blow, even if they were as beasts of the field. We might hear their excuse and grant them pardon for killing those worthy men, but how can we excuse them for banishing under such pitiful and heart-breaking circumstances the innocent families of their victims - infants, delicate women and aged men - and inflicting on them other forms of suffering in addition to the agonies they had already endured in the death of those who were the support of their homes?

God says, "No burdened soul shall bear the burden of another." Even if we could let all this pass, how is it possible we can forgive them confiscating the property and money of those people after bereaving them of their clear ones? Try to suppose we closed our eyes to this, also feeling that they might have some excuse on their side; could we ever forgive them desecrating the grave of that pious, zealous and godly man the Sherif Abd el-Kadir el-Jazairi el-Ilasani?

The above is a brief account of their doings, and we leave humanity at large and Moslems in particular to give their verdict.

We have sufficient proof of how they regard the religion and the Arab people in the fact that they shelled the Ancient House, the Temple of the Divine Unity, of which it is said in the word of God, "Purify my House for those that pass round it," the Kibla of Mohammedans, the Kaaba of believers in the Unity, firing two shells at it from their big guns when the country rose to demand its independence.

One fell about a yard and a half above the Black Stone and the other three yards from it. The covering of the Kaaba was set in a blaze. Thousands of Moslems rushed up with shouts of alarm and despair to extinguish the flames.

To reach the fire they were compelled to open the door of the building and climb on to the roof. The enemy fired a third shell at the Makam Ibrahim in addition to the projectiles and bullets aimed at the rest of the building. Every day three or four people in the building itself were killed, and at last it became difficult for the Moslems to approach the Kaaba at all.

We leave the whole Mohammedan world from East to West to pass judgment on this contempt and profanation of the Sacred House. But we are determined not to leave our religious and national rights as a plaything in the hands of the Union and Progress Party.

God (blessed and exalted be He) has vouchsafed the land an opportunity to rise in revolt, has enabled her by His power and might to seize her independence and crown her efforts with prosperity and victory, even after she was crushed by the maladministration of the Turkish civil and military officials.

She stands quite apart and distinct from countries that still groan under the yoke of the Union and Progress Government. She is independent in the fullest sense of the word, freed from the rule of strangers and purged of every foreign influence. Her principles are to defend the faith of Islam, to elevate the Moslem people, to found their conduct on Holy Law, to build up the code of justice on the same foundation in harmony with the principles of religion, to practice its ceremonies in accordance with modern progress, and make a genuine revolution by sparing no pains in spreading education among all classes according to their station and their needs.

This is the policy we have undertaken in order to fulfil our religious duty, trusting that all our brother Moslems in the East and West will pursue the same in fulfilment of their duty to us, and so strengthen the bands of the Islamic brotherhood.

We raise our hands humbly to the Lord of Lords for the sake of the Prophet of the All-Bountiful King that we may be granted success and guidance in whatsoever is for the good of Islam and the Moslems. We rely upon Almighty God, who is our Sufficiency and the best Defender.

Sir W. BYLES asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he is aware that Private Ernest Richard Bowyer, No. 290739, l/7th Battalion Welsh Regiment, belonging to North Salford, but now stationed at Marton Hall, Yorkshire, has lately been punished by being confined to barracks without pay for one month and given field punishment No. 1. which means being handcuffed and tied to a tree for two hours each day; whether he is aware that this young soldier is only sixteen, years of age and three months and has served a year with the Colours, and that his offence was that he overstayed his first leave; and whether he will take steps to prevent punishments of these kinds to lads of sixteen years of age?

Mr. FORSTER It is necessary to call for a report in this case, and I will communicate with my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

During the last air raid we are told that the employees of one large firm started singing "Dixie Land." We feel, however, that to combat the enemy's aircraft much sterner measures must be adopted.

"The Huns' diet is low," says a correspondent of The Daily Mail. But then their tastes are low too.

A new epidemic, of which "bodily swellings" are the first symptom, is reported by the German papers. And just when the previous epidemic of head-swellings was beginning to subside.

Special "storm troops"—men picked for their youth, vigour and daring, to carry out counter-attacks—are now a feature of the German Armies. Even our ordinary British soldiers, who are constantly compelled to take these brave fellows prisoners, bear witness to the ferocity of their appearance.

The High Court at the Hague has ordered a new trial in the case of the Editor of the Telegraaf, who was sentenced for referring to "a group of rascals in the centre of Europe." The rascality of the persons in question is now deemed to be proved beyond the shadow of a doubt.

Brothers died in 1917 - a listing of known sets of brothers who died on the same date in 1917.

27 June 1917 - Angus, 23, and Kenneth McLeod, 18, died whilst serving with the 14th Battalion, the Canadian Infantry (Quebec Regiment). Sons of Alexander and Barbara McLeod of Springhill, P.Q., Canada. The brothers are buried in Beehive Cemetery, Willerval.

ANGUS ALEXANDER McLEOD, aged 23, and his brother KENNETH ANGUS McLEOD, aged 18, died whilst serving with the 14th Battalion, the Canadian Infantry (Royal Montreal Regiment). This was part of the 3rd. Brigade of the 1st. Canadian Division. On that 27th of June 1917, so the war diary tells, 210 men and two officers of the 14th. Battalion were on a working party in the trenches, carrying materiel to the frontline. They then were shelled by the Germans, causing 12 wounded soldiers and the death of 3 soldiers (see page war diary in this post). The McLeod brothers were 2 of the 3 men who were killed. They are both buried in adjacent graves at Beehive Cemetery at Willerval (the Vimy region in France). They were the sons of Alexander and Barbara McLeod of Springhill, P.Q., Canada. LEST WE FORGET.

On this day, 27 June, 1905 a protest erupted onboard the Russian battleship Potemkin. It became one of the most dramatic events of the 1905 Russian Revolution. For eleven days sailors of the Black Sea Fleet held control of the battleship supporting the revolution and striking fear in the Tsarist government.

No 198 Squadron - Formed as No 198 (Depot) Squadron at Rochford on 27 June 1917, it was tasked with night training. Until September this was merely elementary training but from that month it also provided advanced training. It disbanded in September 1919

SANDERS, Lieut Commander Edward, RNR – award received by father, E H Sanders, of Takapuna. The announcement of the Naval hero’s name was received with deafening cheers. The Gazette stated that for 16 months the late Lieutenant Commander had been in command of one of His Majesty’s ships engaged in combating enemy submarines and he had been awarded the Victoria Cross and the Distinguished Service Order in connection with the great gallantry he had displayed on several occasions with enemy submarines.

William Edward Sanders VC, DSO (7 February 1883 - 14 August 1917) was a New Zealander recipient of the Victoria Cross, the highest and most prestigious award for gallantry in the face of the enemy that can be awarded to British and Commonwealth forces.(...)

During the early part of the war, he spent a year as a Merchant Navy officer on the troopships Moeraki and Willochra. He rapidly became bored with this service, and in June 1915 Sanders was gazetted an acting lieutenant in the Royal Naval Reserve. It was in this rank and position that he served until 1916, when he was granted a position on a Q ship operating against German submarines in the Western Approaches. He was first given the Helgoland, but in February 1917, when he was 34 years old, he was put in command of the Prize, a German sailing barque seized in 1914 and now employed as a lure against submarines.

On 30 April 1917 about 180 miles south of Ireland, in the Atlantic, Lieutenant Sanders was in command of HMS Prize, a three-masted topsail schooner (one of the Q ships) when she was attacked by German U-boat U-93 and badly damaged by shellfire. After the 'panic party' had taken to the boats and the ship appeared to be sinking, the U-boat approached to within 80 yards of her port quarter, whereupon the White Ensign was hoisted and the Prize opened fire. Within a few minutes the submarine was on fire and her bows rose in the air, whilst the Prize was further damaged. The U-boat disappeared from sight, and was believed to have been sunk by the crew of the Prize and by several of the German crew (including her captain) who had been blown or jumped into the sea.

Amazingly, neither of the crippled ships had sunk, with the Prize being towed in flames back to Kinsale, while the U-93 struggled back to the Sylt nine days later after a dramatic escape effort through the British mine and destroyer barrages off Dover. Four months later the Prize was lost, when patrolling with the British submarine D-9 in the same area. In this instance, the U-43 spotted the ships and was attacked in a very similar manner to her compatriot. Her captain had been warned by the survivors of U-93, and so did not engage too closely, instead, firing two torpeodes into the fragile Prize, blowing her to pieces. Rescue craft were unable to find a trace of her crew when they arrived in the area, long after the U-boat had escaped.

Thus was Lieutenant (later Lieutenant-Commander) Sanders killed in action, at sea in the Atlantic near southern Ireland, on 14 August 1917, along with his entire crew. In June 1918, Sanders' father received his son's V.C. and DSO from the Governor-General of New Zealand at Auckland Town Hall.

Died of Wounds - ELLEN
Rifleman George Ellen, who recently died of wounds in France was the 2nd son of Mrs Valentine Allen of Staveley, Ashburton County. He lived at Chertsey where his wife and little son still live. he was a blacksmith by trade ----- left with the 25th Reinforcements, and was twice wounded. His 2 brothers who wen t with the 6th and 17th Reinforcements have returned to NZ.

Killed in Action - TAYLOR
Mr and Mrs Taylor of Cooper's Creek, advised their son Private R.Taylor has been killed in action in France. private taylor served his apprenticeship at A.j.White's chairmaking factory -- enlisted with the 25th Reinforcements. interested in all sports, including motor-boating and yachting -- was born and educated at Cooper's Creek and late resided at St Albans.

Wounded in Action - McLAUGHLIN
Mr W.McLaughlin of Irwell, his son Lieutenant Stewart McLaughlin, reported wounded and gassed is still seriously ill but improvng. enlisted at age 20 -- left with 28th Reinforcements, he was educated at Irwell School and Southbridge DHS. and worked on his father's farm prior to enlisting.

27 June, 1918 - Canadian Hospital ship Llandovery Castle sunk by German U-Boat. Life boats were pursued and sunk. 234 were killed, including 14 nursing sisters. 24 survived. This attack proved a rallying cry for the Canadian troops for the rest of the war.

June 27, 1918 - the Canadian hospital ship Llandovery Castle was torpedoed; 14 Nursing Sisters were killed.
Some 234 people were killed during the First World War when the Canadian hospital ship Llandovery Castle was torpedoed by a German submarine off the coast of Ireland on June 27, 1918. Shockingly, the submarine then surfaced to run down the lifeboats and machine gun any survivors seen in the water. Fourteen Nursing Sisters were among those who lost their lives in the sinking and subsequent attacks.

On June 27, 1919 Goldman spent her 50th birthday behind prison walls, where she was serving a two year prison term in Jefferson City, Missouri, for her conviction, along with Alexander Berkman, for conspiracy against the Selective Service Act of 1917 (for publicly speaking out against conscription).

On this your birthday in the city where you worked struggled and have most friends we send you love and assurance of devotion. Hope that the next half century will have greater possibilities for service and self assertion. Trust that the coming year will see you free

Drizzled most of the day. Bombardment continuing. De Lisle looked in at about 10am. Last night the 36th Divn in their raid brought back 1 officer 1 NCO and 11men prisoners. The Newfoundland Bn (88th Brigade) carried out a raid from our trenches but failed to get through the wire. The 86th Bde had wire-cutting patrols out, an NCO of one of these parties looked into the German frontline trench and found it fully occupied. None of these parties had any casualties. Went into Acheux in a divn car at about 12 midday to make arrangements for tonight as the 86th Bde have 3 raids on, the Newfoundlanders one, and the Borders one; besides these there are a lot of wire cutting parties out. They are all going out between 12 and 1am, during which hour our guns will not fire on the german frontline trenches.

From the Frontline: Somme 1916Brigadier General CHT Lucas was CO of the 87th Brigade on the Somme. An Old Contemptible and Captain in the BEF, he had spent 1915 in the Dardanelles. This blog is made up of his Diary entries and letters written in the Summer of 1916. These are his words, published on the corresponding day as when they were written in 1916.

After leave when he spent time in the hills around Harlech, Graves returned to France on June 27th 1916 with the rank of captain. He arrived too late to be involved in the first days of the Battle of the Somme. In the second week of July he moved in to the Somme battlefield – near to Mametz Wood where the 38th Welsh Division had suffered many casualties. He had to camp near to where many bodies still lay on the battlefield – “a certain cure for the lust of blood”.

Sir F. HALL asked the Undersecretary of State for War if leather boots are supplied to German prisoners of war in this country; whether English prisoners in Germany are generally furnished with wooden clogs as footwear when their boots need renewing; and if, in view of the shortage of leather, he will consider as to adopting the same practice in the case of German prisoners?

Mr. MACPHERSON The answer to the first and second parts of the question is in the affirmative. The boots issued to German prisoners of war are old Army boots which are unfit to be repaired for issue to the troops. New boots, or boots which can be made serviceable for Army purposes, are never issued. Clogs are issued whenever the supply of old Army boots is insufficient. This arrangement is more economical than to issue wooden clogs on all occasions.

Image: a small sketch of a dogfight between four German and two British aircraft against a blue sky and stylised clouds, which includes handwritten notes below. text: 'I want to give an idea of the jumble, the limitless space & at the same time the graceful & always balanced movement'.

Label context: 'The picture that I have got in mind to do first is of a dog fight in the air...The proportions and positions of the machines are everything, as you may imagine. I have got more of the space, speed and grace of the machines, which is what I want. When it is finished I will go on to the 'Archie-burst over the Alps', but just at present this other one claims all my thoughts.'
Extract from a letter to Richard Carline, 27 June 1918.

British diplomacy with America and Ireland, an Ambassador's letters, 1909-1962 : Correspondence for June-August 1918

Murray's efforts on behalf of Anglo-American relations continued to be the main focus of his correspondence from May to August 1918. Despite the German offensive in the spring of 1918, steady progress was being made in the American war effort; and Wiseman wrote to Murray that there was a "good war sentiment" in the USA (Wiseman to Murray, 7 June 1918). Murray's role in British intelligence relating to the USA is indicated by a comment in this letter. "Both Reading and House were delighted when I told them of the arrangement you and I had made in London, and what you were doing for us. We all feel that the circle is now complete". Another compliment appears in a letter from the Military Attaché in Washington. "Your policy of playing the game with the US has proved to be the best, as in times of emergency they give us everything they have got" (Miller to Murray, 24 June 1918).By the end of June, Murray and the British had cause for satisfaction as regards the US contribution to the War. Describing his own role, Murray said that, since August 1917, he had done his best "to speed up the American War Machine". Initially the US Government had been handicapped by the fact that the USA was such a large country and by the severe winter at the end of 1917. But President Woodrow Wilson took the vital decision to put US battalions into the British forces in Europe rather than wait for separate US divisions to be formed, and this had greatly helped the Allied war effort in 1918 (Murray to Freeman, 27 June 1918).However, Ireland continued to be a problem, and Murray worried about the effects on American public opinion of the introduction of conscription and the delay in Home Rule (Murray to Freeman, 27 June 1918). Writing to Wiseman in July he said "I must confess I am very disappointed about the Irish situation in general." He lamented lack of progress, noting that "it looks very much as though there are certain elements in the Unionist Party, not unconnected with the Government, who propose to make every endeavour to shelve Home Rule". He continued: "We may have to wait till after a General Election before there is any real move to settle the Irish Question either by itself or as part of a federal movement" (Murray to Wiseman, 9 July 1918).Lord Reading returned to Britain on 6 August 1918, and Murray met him at Liverpool and accompanied him to London. Murray warned Wiseman that Reading was not prepared to continue indefinitely as Ambassador to the USA and was anxious to return to his position as Lord Chief Justice as soon as the situation allowed. But there seemed every prospect that the War would continue into 1919, even though the German spring offensive had been turned back. Murray also took the opportunity to complain about a speech made by Lloyd George in the House of Commons in which he had given the impression that Wilson had only agreed to brigade US troops into the British and French armies after the German attack of March 1918 whereas the American President had already agreed to this before March (Murray to Wiseman, 8 Aug 1918).

NOTE FROM CHICHERIN TO LOCKHART, BRITISH AGENT IN MOSCOW,
ON THE BRITISH LANDING AT MURMANSK

27 June 1918
Kluchnikov & Sabanin, II, p. 47 (dated 28,June)

At the desire of the working people, conscious of the identity and solidarity of their interests with those of the working masses of the entire world, the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic withdrew from the ranks of the belligerent Powers and from the war which the internal situation of Russia made it impossible for it to carry on any longer. The working people of Russia, and the workers' and peasants' Government which carries out their will, are only anxious to live in peace and friendship with all other nations. The labouring people of Russia threaten no other people with war, and no danger can threaten Great Britain from their side. The more emphatic therefore is the protest of the workers' and peasants' Government of Russia against the incursion into Russia, caused by no act of aggression on its part, of the English military detachment which has recently arrived at Murmansk. The armed forces of the Russian Republic have been instructed to defend the Murmansk coast against all foreign attacks, and the Soviet troops will hasten to perform their task, carrying out their revolutionary duty to the end, keeping guard over Soviet Russia. The People's Commissariat for Foreign Affairs insists in the most categorical manner that no British armed force, nor the force ofany other foreign Power, must be found at Murmansk, a town in neutral Russia. Furthermore, the Commissariat reiterates once again the protest it has already frequently entered against the presence of English warships in the port of Murmansk and it expresses the firm conviction that the British Government will withdraw from a step which violates Russia's international position, and that the working people of Russia, who warmly desire to maintain their friendly relations with Great Britain unimpaired, will not against their will be placed in a position which is out of keeping with their most sincere aspirations.

WORCESTER LOCK-KEEPER’S FINE RECORD – Cpl. A Woodward of the Worcestershire Regiment (and of Stoke Heath, Bromsgrove), on June 1st was awarded the Croix de Guerre by the French Government for courage and devotion to duty. On June 4th he was awarded the D.C.M. for conspicuous gallantry in action. When all the other officers and non-commissioned officers were shot down, he rallied his men and held the enemy back. He attended to his Captain, who was mortally wounded, under heavy fire.

Today was the day, a century ago, that the politics of Greece sorted itself out, at least for the moment. The monarchy, if not pro-German then at least unwilling to upset Germany, had been driven from Athens, and a Provisional Government – based in the northwest of the country, led by veteran statesman Eleftherios Venizelos and protected by the huge Allied army camped at Salonika – finally took formal control over the state as a whole.

So what had happened to untie the political and diplomatic knot that had condemned Greece to almost two years of virtual civil war? It hardly needs saying, this being the imperial world war, that the big European empires had something to do with it, and if you’ve checked into any of my earlier rambles through Greece you won’t be surprised to find that the French were the prime movers.

Most of the French government, the French armed forces and the French population had been united in coercing the Allies into parking an international army at Salonika, and keeping it there, by way of appearing to defend Serbia. Government and armed forces were less united when it came to dealing with Greek King Constantine and his apparently pro-German regime. The French government kept faith with diplomatic efforts to persuade Constantine into the Allied ranks, a cause made plausible by the monarch’s affable, courteous assurances that he was almost ready to agree. Meanwhile the French Army and Navy, which dominated Allied operations in the theatre, encouraged the breakaway, pro-Allied movement led by Venizelos and plotted the King’s overthrow.

This destructive echo of the divisions in elite French society reached a crisis at the end of 1916, when the military found excuses to send French ground forces into Athens, and royalist Greek troops used extreme force to drive them away (1 December, 1916: Gunboat Diplomacy). At this point, the French political establishment and population lost patience with Constantine, but for a lot of very good reasons they were in no position to do anything about it for a few months.

Once the French war effort had gone through a change of government, the disastrous Nivelle Offensive and the Army’s mass mutiny; once the world and all its battlefronts had taken a deep, shocked breath in the cosmically uncertain aftermath of revolution in Russia; and once the vast, multinational collection of diseased, demoralised or potentially mutinous troops at Salonika could be trusted to at least look menacing – the French got rid of King Constantine.

It wasn’t a difficult job. On 11 June, French forces seized strategic points in southern Greece and presented an ultimatum demanding Constantine’s removal from power. Constantine left the country next day, abdicating in favour of his second son, Alexander, leaving the way clear for the resignation of the royalist government, the appointment of Venizelos as premier and, on 27 June, his arrival in Athens.

The Provisional Government had declared war against Germany in November 1916, and the declaration became effective for all of Greece on 29 June, while a ‘state of war’ was declared against Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire. What had been the Provisional Government’s 60,000-strong Army of National Defence became the basis for a reconstituted Greek national army, which joined Allied forces on the Salonika front in July, and Greek ships seized during the previous year’s quarrels were returned to join Allied anti-submarine forces in the Mediterranean.

So the Allies had finally brought Greece into the War after almost three years of tying themselves in knots trying. History backs the impression held by contemporary critics, that the success added almost no strategic value to the Allied cause and had cost far more than it was worth – but the same can be said of almost all the bribes offered to entice smaller countries into the conflict. More resonantly from a modern perspective, the French had overridden mild objections from the British and Italians to institute regime change in Greece. To liberal opinion worldwide, and despite reservations about the means involved, this at least seemed cause for some satisfaction, because Venizelos espoused liberal values and boasted a solid record as a supporter of representative democracy. After decades of turbulence and war, surely the people of Greece could at last look forward to a more stable and peaceful future.

Well, no…

Venizelos was indeed inclined to follow democratic process, but he was above all a nationalist. He went on to prove it by demanding full satisfaction of his territorial ambitions at the post-War peace conference and, when he didn’t get it, ordering the military occupation of the region around Smyrna (Izmir) in western Turkey, ostensibly to protect the ethnically Greek portion of its population. As Turkish resistance matured into war, and the war went badly for Greece, the illusion of stability evaporated.

The sudden death of King Alexander in October 1920, immediately followed by a landslide electoral defeat for Venizelos and his Liberal Party, brought Constantine back to the throne, but he abdicated again in September 1922 after the final defeat of Greek forces in Turkey. His successor (and eldest son), George II, lasted eighteen months before he was overthrown and a republic proclaimed… and so it went, on and on into the twenty-first century.

I think we know by now that war can make for strange bedfellows – the British and Ibn Sa’ud spring to mind, while Roosevelt and Stalin make the point in spades – and it’s easy to assume such arrangements are the product of clear-eyed realpolitik on both sides. The Greek denouement of June 1917 wasn’t at all like that. Some Allied authorities on the ground understood Venizelos in the context of his political environment, but by 1917 their masters were set on a happy path laid out by their own relentless propaganda.

Years of propaganda had portrayed Venizelos as the good guy, the political moderniser who would bring coherence, stability and a grateful attitude towards western democracies. Meanwhile Constantine, a complex character who was no more willing to join the Central Powers than the Allies, who was liked and trusted by the network of European aristocrats who knew him personally, and who could be described as a peaceful man with the best interests of his people at heart, was publicly dismissed in Allied circles as the greedy partner to tyrants. By 1917 all that propaganda had convinced its creators to invest energy, resources and extravagant promises in a new regime that paid back nothing but the same old trouble – and the trouble has never really gone away.

Like so many other places reshaped by the needs of great powers during the Great War, Greece offered some fairly obvious lessons for future exporters of regime change, especially the one about accepting your own propaganda view of the candidate you’re backing. Lesson learned?

The Foreign Policy of the Russian Revolution - V.I. Lenin 27 June 1917

"The foreign policy of the capitalists and the petty bourgeoisie is “alliance” with the imperialists, that is, disgraceful dependence on them. The foreign policy of the proletariat is alliance with the revolutionaries of the advanced countries and with all the oppressed nations against all and any imperialists."

No idea could be more erroneous or harmful than to separate foreign from home policy. The monstrous falsity of this separation becomes even more monstrous in war-time. Yet the bourgeoisie are doing everything possible and impossible to suggest and promote this idea. Popular ignorance of foreign policy is incomparably greater than of home policy. The “secrecy” of diplomatic relations is sacredly observed in the freest of capitalist countries, in the most democratic republics.

Popular deception has become a real art in foreign “affairs”, and our revolution suffers very badly from this deception. The poison of deception is spread far and wide by the millions of copies of bourgeois newspapers.

You must side with one of the two immensely wealthy and immensely powerful groups of imperialist predators—that is how capitalist reality poses the basic issue, of present-day foreign policy. That is how this issue is posed by the capitalist class. And that, it goes without saying, is how it is posed by the broad mass of the petty bourgeoisie who have retained their old, capitalist views and prejudices.

Those whose thinking does not go beyond capitalist relations cannot understand why the workers, if they are politically conscious, cannot side with either group of imperialist plunderers. Conversely, the worker cannot understand why socialists who remain true to the fraternal alliance of the workers of the world against the capitalists of the world are accused of being inclined towards a separate peace treaty with the Germans, or of virtually serving such a peace treaty. Under no circumstances can these socialists (and hence the Bolsheviks) agree to a separate peace treaty between the capitalists. The basis for the foreign policy of the politically-conscious proletariat is no separate peace treaty with the German capitalists and no alliance with the Anglo-French capitalists.

By rising up in arms against that programme because they fear a break with “Britain and France”, our Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries are virtually carrying out a capitalist foreign policy programme, while embellishing it with florid and innocent phrases about “revision of treaties”, declarations in support of “peace without annexations”, etc. All these pious wishes are doomed to remain hollow phrases, for capitalist reality puts the issue bluntly: either submit to the imperialists of one of the two groups, or wage a revolutionary struggle against all imperialists.

Have we any allies for this struggle? Yes. The oppressed classes of Europe, primarily the proletariat. The peoples oppressed by imperialism, primarily our neighbours in Asia.

The Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, who call themselves “revolutionary democrats”, are in fact pursuing a counter-revolutionary and anti-democratic foreign policy. Were they revolutionaries, they would advise the workers and peasants of Russia to march at the head of all peoples oppressed by imperialism and of all the oppressed classes.

“But in that event the capitalists of all other countries would rally against Russia,” the frightened philistines object. That is not impossible. No “revolutionary” democrat has the right to renounce revolutionary war in advance. But the practical likelihood of such a war is not very great. The British and German imperialists will not be able to “come to terms” against revolutionary Russia.

The Russian revolution, which as early as 1905 led to revolutions in Turkey, Persia and China, would have placed the German and British imperialists in a very difficult position if it had begun to establish a truly revolutionary alliance of the workers and peasants of the colonies and semi-colonies against the despots, against the khans, for expulsion of the Germans from Turkey, the British from Turkey, Persia, India, Egypt, etc.

Social-chauvinists, both French and Russian, like to refer to 1793. By this spectacular reference they try to cover up their betrayal of the revolution. But people here refuse to think that the truly “revolutionary” democrats in Russia could and should act in the spirit of 1793 towards the oppressed and backward nations.

The foreign policy of the capitalists and the petty bourgeoisie is “alliance” with the imperialists, that is, disgraceful dependence on them. The foreign policy of the proletariat is alliance with the revolutionaries of the advanced countries and with all the oppressed nations against all and any imperialists.

"We are for unity with them as long as they fight against the counter-revolution. We are against unity with them as long as they ally themselves with the counter-revolution."

The Congress resolution in today’s papers condemning our Party will no doubt be compared by every class-conscious worker and soldier with our Party’s statement addressed to the All-Russia Congress of Soviets, a statement made public on the 11th, and printed in today’s Pravda.[1]

The contradictory nature of the stand taken by the Congress leaders has been revealed by their resolution and particularly by our statement.

“The basis for the success and strength of the Russian revolution is the unity of all revolutionary democrats—the workers, soldiers, and peasants," reads the first and cardinal clause of the Congress resolution. And, of course, this point would undoubtedly he correct if what it meant by “unity” were unity in the struggle against the counter-revolution . But what if through their leaders a certain number of the "workers, soldiers and peasants" form a bloc and units with the counter-revolution? Isn’t it clear that this section of the “democrats” is in reality no longer “revolutionary”?

The Narodniks (Socialist-Revolutionaries) and the Mensheviks mill probably be indignant at the mere fact that we think it possible, that we think it conceivable, for any section of the "workers, soldiers and peasants" to “unite” with the counter-revolution.

To those who attempted to obscure our arguments and hush up the issue by indignation, we would reply by simply referring them to the third clause of the same resolution: ”... the resistance of the counter-revolutionary groups of the propertied classes is growing." This is an important statement. It would have been perfectly correct if it had said: the bourgeoisie, or capitalists, and landowners (instead of the "propertied classes", which include the well-to-do section of the petty bourgeoisie).

Unquestionably, the resistance of the bourgeoisie is growing.

But then it is the bourgeoisie that control the majority in the Provisional Government with whom the Socialist- Revolutionary and the Menshevik leaders have united, not only in general political terms, but also organisationally, in one institution, the Ministry!

This is the pivot of the contradictory stand taken by the leaders of the Congress, this is the fundamental source of the instability of their entire policy. They are allied with the bourgeoisie via the government, where they are controlled by the bourgeois Ministers forming the majority. At the same time, they are forced to admit that "the resistance of the counter-revolutionary groups of the propertied classes is growing"’

It is obvious that, under the circumstances, the party of the revolutionary proletariat can accept “unity” with the “revolutionary” democrats (revolutionary in word but not deed) only up to a certain point. We are for unity with them as long as they fight against the counter-revolution. We are against unity with them as long as they ally themselves with the counter-revolution.

The "growing resistance" of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie is an urgent problem posed by reality. To evade this main and fundamental issue through non-committal phrases about "the unity and co-ordinated actions of the revolutionary democrats", thereby glossing over the unity or co-ordination between a section of the revolutionary democrats and the counter-revolution, would be illogical and foolish.

Hence, all the arguments in the Congress resolution condemning our demonstration as “clandestine” and maintaining that mass actions and demonstrations are permissible only with the knowledge or consent of the Soviets, fall to the ground as a matter of principle. These arguments are of no consequence at all. The workers’ party will never accept them, as we have already said in our statement to the All-Russia Congress. For every demonstration is merely a means of agitation as long as it is peaceful, and you can neither ban agitation not impose uniformity on it.

On the formal side, the resolution is even weaker. To ban or decree you must be vested with state power. First achieve that, you gentlemen who now lead the Congress—we are in favour of it, although you are our opponents—and then you will have the right to ban or decree. At the moment you do not wield state power, at the moment you allow your selves to be swayed by the ten bourgeois Ministers—you are caught in the meshes of your own weakness and indecision.

Phrases like a "clearly expressed will", and so on, will not do. A will, if it is the will of the state, must be expressed in the form of a law established by the state. Otherwise the word “will” is an empty sound. The moment you thought of law , gentlemen, you would have been certain to recall that the Constitution of a free republic cannot ban peaceful demonstrations or any mass actions by any party or group.

A contradictory stand has bred very strange revolutionary ideas—ideas as to the struggle against the counter-revolution, ideas about the state (Constitution), and ideas of law in general. With the furious abuse against our Party refuted, nothing is left, nothing whatsoever!

Despite the furious abuse against our proposed demonstration, the demonstration is to be held a week later.

Notes
[1] Reference is to the statement which the Central Committee of the R.S.D.L.P.(B.) and the Bureau of the Bolshevik group at the First All-Russia Congress of Soviets made regarding the ban on the peaceful demonstration appointed by the Bolshevik Party for June 10 (23), 1917. The statement exposed the provocative conduct of the Menshevik and S.R. loaders of the Congress of Soviets, who banned the demonstration, and the counter-revolutionary policies of the Provisional Government. It warned that the revolution was in danger, and called oil the working class to be staunch and vigilant.
The statement was road at the joint meeting of the Congress Steering Committee, the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet, the Executive Committee of the Congress of Peasants’ Deputies, and the bureaus of all Congress parties on June 11 (24). The Bolsheviks had wanted the statement to be read at the Congress sitting on June 12 (25), but the chairman of the meeting denied the Bolsheviks the floor. The statement was therefore handed to the Congress Steering Committee. The same sitting passed a resolution condemning the Bolshevik Party despite the fact that the Bolsheviks had called off the demonstration.

... writes home to say that he been in France for twelve months now and has made a few £2 bets that the war will be over by the end of August

What, oh! for the time, when one can wash, bathe, shave, and shave daily. One does not appreciate these benefits in civilian life, but this war has taught us all wonders—how to appreciate things by finding out we never knew when we were well off.

As the potato export season begins winding down, a committee of local merchants have come together to demonstrate farming industry support for the war effort. They have been asking for donations towards a consignment of potatoes being sent as a gift to the Royal Navy.

Farmers have been responding generously, some giving part loads, some full loads. To date, over 250 tonnes have been donated. The public have also been able to show their support through financial contributions. An auction organised at the Weighbridge this week raised over £60, with people bidding for lots including a case of champagne, two bags of sugar and a ‘captured’ German 25 Mark note that sold for seven shillings.

At the same time, there is news emerging that the UK Government has approached the States with a plan to requisition Jersey Royals for feeding the troops. An appointed committee is considering arrangements, with Captain J. E. Dickinson of Army Service Corps appointed as the requisitioning officer. It is likely that all remaining potatoes will be required, except those needed as seed for next year. There will be a fixed price paid, at a fair rate to be decided.

27 June 1916 - We are still here in rest but I think that today is probably the last day. Tomorrow, all being well, we shall shift up somewhat nearer the line again. But for the weather this little place would be very nice indeed, but the constant showers, very heavy showers they are too, turn all the roads, fields, and everything else into rivers and lakes of liquid mud. The trenches too have of late become very uncomfortable. Please thank Mary for her letter, I am sorry to hear that the cow has a horrid “corf”. Her handwriting has improved tremendously since the last letter – she must be becoming quite learned now I suppose. Certainly the signature at the end of the letter was very wonderful. Toller has at last got a command – he certainly has had to wait long enough, and thoroughly deserves it. He goes today to take charge of some Highland Territorial Battalion. He will not have to transfer but will simply be attending so we shall not have the pleasure of seeing him in kilts or anything of that sort. We gave him a farewell dinner last night – with a very full mess indeed – everyone was present and we sat down 38. As I probably told you the mess room consists of a large tarpaulin stretched over a light frame-work. At eight o’clock punctually it started to rain – then to pour, and finally to come down in bathfuls. In a few minutes the roof was dripping in almost every place and we had to feed in overcoats. This however was the only misfortune and it was not sufficient to damp the enthusiasm of the mess. The Colonel made a most admirable little speech and Toller replied – he is I think a little sad at having to go. We then sang all the Scotch songs we could think of – by way of honour to the new Colonel – and many others that were not Scotch, and finally ended up by somewhere near midnight with “Auld Lang Syne”. Toller’s going just now is really rather serious because there is no one to take his place as second in command, or rather I should say, that if the C.O. were to be hors de combat, there is no one who could take command of the battalion, and one wants a second in C. who can do that. It is very probable that within a week or so the Brigadier will send me back to Command a Company – it is hardly fair to keep away a Captain from the regiment, when there are so few left of those who originally formed the mess, in the old Luton Days. Personally I should not be at all sorry to return. I spent yesterday afternoon looking for J.D. Fry – my shooting XIII Secretary for one year – who wrote me a note to say that he was somewhere in the neighbourhood. As a matter of fact I failed to find him, and could not even discover where his regiment was: however I daresay I shall run into him and them in a day or two. It is most remarkable how small the army seems to be – one is always running into all sorts and kinds of people that one knows. Last night was far too wet for star-gazing so I had to bring my bed inside and sleep in Hacking’s room again. It was as well that I did because it poured very hard at intervals during the early hours of the morning. It is now going on in just the same way: we get spells of sunshine, and then one after another these heavy black clouds come rolling up – shower tons of water on to us, and then roll on again to do the same , we hope, or worse to the Bosch. Every evening it looks as though it wanted to clear up, and as if we should have a fine spell, but it always comes on again the next day – and we have quite given up hope of any real improvement. Tonight the local padre is coming to dinner as the guest of the Brigadier who is billeted at the vicarage. This is always rather an amusing performance as the padre can never talk English and the General has to air his French – which he is always very willing to do. Whether or no he is understood is another matter, but everybody is always pleased, and the success of the entente cordiale doubly assured by the display of camaraderie between the two nations.